[No earlier than 1920 — no later than February 2, 1921]

## NOTES IN THE BOOK BY FRIEDRICH ENGELS
"COLLECTED ARTICLES, EXCERPTS AND DOCUMENTS".
VIENNA, 1920¹

[No earlier than 1920 — no later than February 2, 1921]

NB p. 5 and
p. 207*

[5] "...It goes without saying that in Germany pure democracy plays a far more secondary role than in countries with more ancient industrial development. But this will not prevent it, at the moment of revolution, from acquiring for a short time temporary significance as the most extreme bourgeois party... in the role of the last anchor of salvation for all bourgeois and even feudal economy. At such a moment the entire reactionary mass will line up behind it and strengthen it: everything that was reactionary will then don the democratic mask... This was the case in every revolution: the most accommodating of the parties, capable in general of still forming a government, is drawn to power... In any case, during the crisis and the day after it, our sole opponent will be the entire reactionary mass, uniting around pure democracy..." ** ²

Transfer from p[revious page]

## NOTES IN F. ENGELS' BROCHURE
"POLITICAL TESTAMENT.
FROM UNPUBLISHED LETTERS".
BERLIN, 1920¹

[No earlier than 1920 — no later than February 2, 1921]

Lenin

NB pp. 18-19 ||
| Dec. 11-12, 1884

NB pp. 24-6*

|(3] ? Petrograd, August 1920.
N. R.**

[16-19] We possess an enormous advantage in that the industrial revolution is in full swing with us, whereas in France and England it is essentially already completed. There the division between town and country, between industrial and agricultural regions has already reached such a degree that it is subject only to slow changes. There people in their essential mass appear in the world under those conditions in which they will subsequently have to live; they are accustomed to these conditions and even regard fluctuations and crises as something almost self-evident. Moreover—memories of previous unsuccessful attempts at movement. With us, on the contrary, everything is still in flux and motion. The remnants of the old small-scale industrial production of peasants, which served only the satisfaction of their own needs, are being displaced by capitalist domestic industry, while in other places capitalist domestic industry, in turn, is yielding to machinery. And it is precisely the nature of our industry, limping behind other countries, that makes the revolution so thorough. Since mass production of articles of wide consumption and luxury articles has already been seized by the English and French, our export industry is left for the most part with all sorts of trifles, which, however, are also consumed by the broad masses and are produced first by domestic industry and only later, when production becomes mass production—by machinery. Thanks to this, domestic (capitalist) industry captures far more extensive areas and thereby more thoroughly clears the ground. If we exclude the Prussian territories east of the Elbe, that is, East and West Prussia, Pomerania, Poznań and most of Brandenburg, as well as Old Bavaria, there remain few regions where the peasant is not being drawn more and more into domestic industry. The territory revolutionized in this way becomes more extensive with us than anywhere else.

Furthermore. Owing to the fact that the worker engaged in domestic industry usually tills his little plot of land, there arises the possibility of reducing his wages more than anywhere else. What was formerly a blessing for the common people—the combination of agriculture with industrial activity—now becomes the strongest means of capitalist exploitation. A plot of land for potatoes, a cow, a strip of arable land allow the worker to sell his labor power below its value; they force him to do so because they tie the worker to a plot of land which, however, is only able to feed him partially. Hence our industry acquires the capacity to export because it, in the majority of cases, gives the entire surplus value to the buyer, while the capitalist's profit is formed by reducing the normal wage. This is observed to a greater or lesser degree in all rural domestic industry, but nowhere is it expressed so sharply as with us.

Moreover, our industrial revolution, set in motion by the revolution of 1848 with its bourgeois achievements (however weak they might be), was enormously accelerated thanks to 1) the elimination of internal barriers in 1866-1870 and 2) the French billions, which ultimately had to find capitalist application². Thus we have achieved an industrial revolution more radical and deep, unfolded over a larger area and more comprehensive than in other countries, and possessing at the same time a completely fresh, untouched, not demoralized by defeats proletariat and, finally, possessing—thanks to Marx—such an understanding of the causes of economic and political development and the conditions of the impending revolution as no one among our predecessors possessed. It is precisely for this reason that we are obliged to be victorious.

As far as pure democracy and its role in the future are concerned, I do not agree with you. It goes without saying that in Germany it plays a far more secondary role than in countries with more ancient industrial development. But this will not prevent it, at the moment of revolution, from acquiring for a short time temporary significance as the most extreme bourgeois party, as it already appeared at Frankfurt³, in the role of the last anchor of salvation for all bourgeois and even feudal economy. At such a moment the entire reactionary mass will line up behind it and strengthen it: everything that was reactionary will then don the democratic mask. Just so in 1848, the entire feudal-bureaucratic mass from March to September supported the liberals in order to keep the revolutionary masses in subjection and in order then, when that was done, to drive out, of course, the liberals as well. Thus, in 1848, from May to December's election of Bonaparte, in France the weakest of all parties, the purely republican party "National," dominated only because the entire united reaction was coalescing behind its back. *In every revolution* it was thus: the most accommodating of the parties, capable in general of still forming a government, is drawn to power precisely because the defeated see in it the last possibility of salvation. We cannot count on the majority of the voters, i.e., of the nation, being on our side already at the moment of crisis. All the bourgeoisie and the remnants of the feudal propertied class, the greater part of the petty bourgeoisie and the rural population will then rally around the extreme bourgeois party, which will be in words very revolutionary, and I consider it entirely possible that this party will be represented in the provisional government and even for some time form the majority in it. How not to act under such circumstances, finding oneself in a minority, was shown by the social-democratic minority in the Paris February government of 1848. However, this for now is an academic question.

It is true that in Germany events might take a different turn—for military reasons. Under the present circumstances, an impulse from outside can hardly come from anywhere except Russia. If there is no impulse from Russia and it comes from Germany, then the revolution can begin only with the army. Against the modern army an unarmed people are militarily a negligible quantity. If our reserves aged 20-25, who do not vote but are trained militarily, were to appear on the scene—in that case one could skip over pure democracy. But this question too, at present, is still an academic question, although I, so to speak, as a representative of the main general staff of the party, am obliged to keep it in mind. In any case, during the crisis and the day after it, our sole opponent will be the entire reactionary mass, uniting around pure democracy, and this, as I believe, must in no case be lost sight of⁴.

|24| October 24, 1891.

Since I consider it necessary to tell the French frankly the whole truth about what position we shall be in if it comes to war—a task, of course, devilishly difficult—I have written an article in French⁵... ⁶

|26| If as a result of war we come to power before we are prepared for it, then technical specialists will prove to be our principal adversaries and will deceive and betray us wherever they can; we shall have to resort to intimidating them, and still they will hoodwink us. Thus, on a smaller scale, it always was with the French revolutionaries: they were forced even in ordinary administration to entrust secondary but connected with immediate practical activity posts to former reactionaries, and these did everything to hinder and retard⁷.

Translation from German

# EXTRACTS FROM IMPORTANT DOCUMENTS
OF THE "UNION OF RUSSIAN SOCIAL-DEMOCRATS
ABROAD"¹

[August, before the 24th, 1900]

(1) Letter from I. Palinkovskii (Dec. [18]99) to members
of the URSD, in which he speaks in favor of the proposal of the "Emancipation of Labor group" to accept new members and against the proposal of Grishin and Co. — to make "a declaration against the 'Emancipation of Labor group'".

(Some kind of note on the decision of the congress of 1898 on the printing house)².

(2) "Resolutions and instructions given to the editorial board by the congress of URSD members in 1898" [hectograph]³.

(Embryo of the "Program" of "Rabochee delo").

"The mass workers' movement in Russia is taking on a class character in the process of workers' struggle for their immediate conscious interests and the burning issues of the day".

"Under the system of political disenfranchisement prevailing in Russia, every step of the working class toward the improvement of its economic position is also a struggle against this latter system".

"In Russia more than in any other country, the economic struggle of the working class is inseparable from the political, and in relation to the Russian workers' movement the proposition of scientific socialism is especially true, that every class struggle is a political struggle; on the other hand, political struggle is only the most developed, broad and effective form of economic struggle".

"The vital interests of the working class raise for it the question of political struggle; the immediate political demands of the working class are freedom of strikes, assemblies, speech, press, associations".

"These political rights are necessary conditions for the further development of the workers' movement, successful struggle for the improvement of the position of the working class".

"The struggle of the working class for these rights is itself the process of struggle against autocracy, which will lead to the conquest of full political freedom for the entire people—a democratic constitution".

Economic struggle.....................................................................
Political struggle. Means of political struggle. The editorial board must elucidate that economic struggle—this is the basic condition for the growth of the mass workers' movement, is at the same time the most powerful means for broad political influence on the masses, in other words, for political agitation.

"The second most important means is political propaganda, adapted, of course, to the level of understanding of the given stratum of workers"...

[etc.]

Protocol of the RSD congress⁴ 10 session 10.XII 1898
(Mikhail, Vetrinskii,
Ivanshin, Axelrod,
Efremov, Peskin, Dvinskaia,
Blumenfeld, Koltsov, Zasulich,
Grishin⁵.)

Koltsov proposed
to declare agreement with the Manifesto⁵ ("political freedom is the basic condition and immediate goal," etc.).

Grishin against: in Russia many do not agree with the Manifesto. "In Russia the immediate task of the party is not the conquest of political freedom" (Sic!*)

7 votes against 4 reject the proposal
[P. B., V. I., Blumenfeld and Koltsov]

Unsent letter from V. I. to Grishin⁶, in which she says that Grishin cleverly fooled her, set a trap (by defeating Koltsov's proposal for agreement with the Manifesto and closing the speakers' list), but that treachery never brings benefit. (Heated accusation!)

* — Thus!

Letter from P. B. A. of April 20 from Zurich to Blumenfeld
with complaint about enmity and slander, about carping regarding money, etc.⁷

Letter of URSD secretary Polyakevich: Axelrod received
700 francs of American money — let the "Emancipation of Labor group" contribute at least 288 frs. to the typesetters of the brochure "New Factory Law" and nos. 5-6 of "Rabotnik," which came out under the editorship of
May
the Group (evidently still spring of 1899)⁸.

Blumenfeld left the printing house and demands that the Union pay the debts to the typesetters: but the Union demands money from the "Emancipation of Labor group" (American money).

Extract from the Statute of the URSD (printed). In manuscript: complete statute of "RSD brotherhood" (Sic!) then crossed out and written: "Union of RSD".

§ 1. Declares that it stands on the ground of "international scientific socialism" and "fully shares the basic views of the 'Emancipation of Labor group'".

§ 2. Publishes and distributes literature, establishes connections, seeks funds, etc.

§ 8. Monthly reports of the cashier.

"§ 11. All requests, manuscripts, materials received by the committee—in general everything relating to the literary activity of the "Union"—the committee places at the disposal and discretion of the "Emancipation of Labor group," on which exclusively is laid the execution of literary tasks and the editing of the Union's publications".

(signature:) Committee.

/According to the manuscript statute: "The Com-\
mittee" consists of a secretary, \
cashier and representative of the \
"Emancipation of Labor group". /
\The Committee conducts all business. /

Letter of Polyakevich (secretary) of April 10, [1900]⁹.

"Elections at the last congress": Administration — Polyakevich (secretary), Efremov (cashier), members: Akimov and Somov—from the "Emancipation of Labor group"¹⁰.

??

Editorial Board: Ivanshin, Krichevskii /On the basis of the addendum\
and Markov                    \to the statute of April 9, [1900]/

Control Commission: Mikhail,
Ivanshin and Kruglov